It is not at all clear that:Ann wrote:
But, as for the anti-Stratfordian side - yes, the 17th Earl of Oxford may have written the works of Shakespeare. I'm not convinced, however, because I think that there are very real arguments against him, such as his death in 1604.
- 1) Oxford actually did die in 1604 (e.g., no fanfare Earl's funeral, no will, no grave, etc.)
2) or that post 1604 Shakespeare wasn't edited/revised "by committee" a la the King James Bible.
The best conspiracies are the ones that succeed...but, perhaps somehow, you've never heard of them.Ann wrote:
And the idea of such a complete cover-up that remained hidden for two hundred years or more is a lot more than a mouthful for me to swallow.
I can certainly see that there are arguments against Santa Claus bringing everyone presentsAnn wrote:
On the other hand, I can certainly see that there are arguments against Will Shaksper of Stratford as the author of these immortal works.
on Xmas eve but, then again, there is quite a lot of evidence & tradition in his favor
(; at least, as compared with that supporting the illiterate Stratford boob).
People are convicted of capital crimes everyday on far less evidence than what anti-Stratfordians have provided.Ann wrote:
So my conclusion, Art, is that we don't know who wrote the works of Shakespeare, and we will probably never know. Like I said, that's what I think. But hey, who knows, some day the anti-Stratfordians may blow the world over with the most amazing proof of their point! It could happen, but I don't think it has happened yet.
And yet, all we are asking is that people sign the "The Declaration of Reasonable Doubt."